Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Billy86 wrote: »

Also the tax bill the Republicans all (I think all? Certainly at least 50 of 52) happily signed despite having not looked at it, and it literally having handwritten corrections and scribbles in the margins, remember that one?

Yeah, there was a $289,000,000,000 error in there. You couldn't make this amateur hour sh** up - https://slate.com/business/2017/12/senate-republicans-may-have-made-a-usd260-billion-mistake-in-their-tax-bill.html

As funny as it is, and it really, really is. Isn't it also terrifying the level of incompetence and ignorance there is by people with that level of power?

I watched the announcement in full - a mass of contradictions that defies reality, mixed with the usual 'we're going to build something BIG' undertone.

recedite wrote: »

Trump is firmly on the Israeli side.
Yet again he is fulfilling a clearly signalled election promise. People may find it shocking that a politician would keep an election promise, but The Donald is no ordinary politician and he has been keeping election promises all along.
Now is the perfect time to move the embassy, with Israel strong and the neighbours busy making war on each other.

Some day there will be a single country there and Jerusalem will be the undisputed capital. As with Lebanon, all the people will eventually bury the hatchet and cobble together some sort of agreement in the interests of peace and prosperity.

This all makes perfect sense, IF:
1) you believe it's more important for a presidential candidate to put into action the incredibly stupid, insulting, outrageous, inflammatory and negative promises he made during an election rather than to say "Oh well. He had to say these things to be elected. Of course he didn't mean them. Nobody in their right mind would do something as stupid as....hey wait a minute!"

2) you think that the whole problem with Israel/Palestine is that the Palestinians just won't do what the Israelis tell them to do, despite the fact that the international community (via the UN) approved an Israeli state that was much smaller than it is now and that Jerusalem was always intended to be an internationally administered city, not part of either Israel or Palestine

3) you think that politics and international relations are all about "prosperity". Right! And your evidence for this is? Do you think that many people in Britain were voting for "prosperity" when they voted for Brexit? Like the car workers in Sunderland who were advised by their Nissan bosses to vote Remain and turned around en masse and said "**** you bonny lad!"
Do you think it makes sense for the DUP to copperfasten partition and insist on a complete withdrawal from the EU for Northern Ireland and to hell with what that means for the border?
Like hell.
These positions are taken for emotional reasons. They are examples of "identity politics" which is no less real for being unquantifiable in monetary terms. The only way you can guarantee a "soft border" from teh DUP, and indeed from many of the most ardent Brexiteers across the water is for Ireland to leave the EU also and slip back into the warm embrace of the United Kingdom.
We don't want to do that. Most of us. Why not? Because it's bad for business or because we just don't want to be Brits?

4) You think it's a good idea to make people knuckle under to a despised alien regime just because their ancestors lost a war. And that the best way to build bridges to peace is perpetually to humiliate and belittle your adversaries who have lost their country, their self respect, their homes (in many cases) and a lot of loved ones.

Israel's only right to Jerusalem is the right of conquest. Which can be overturned by right of reconquest. They have been at war for the 70 years of their existence. They will go on being at war, albeit a brutal, low intensity murderous war of reprisal and counter reprisal for the next 70 and beyond.

Because they're too chicken to make a serious attempt at peace.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Mod note:

For the sake of mine and my co-mods' sanity, please let's not cross the streams!

Meh. OK. I was just giving an example of politics having a strong emotional edge that is not always to do with "business" or "trade" or "prosperity" and linking it into something that many here would be familiar with.

But OK. No arguments about Brexit on this forum. I get it.

recedite wrote: »

Most people accept now that the two state solution for Ireland has not been a great success over the last 100 years. Perhaps it was the least worst option at the time, but that's about the best that can be said about it.

Who are these people? Because if you asked most people in Ireland whether they prefer the "two state solution" or being subjects of the British Empire, I don't think you'll get anything close to a majority favouring the latter.

Billy86 wrote: »

Also the tax bill the Republicans all (I think all? Certainly at least 50 of 52) happily signed despite having not looked at it, and it literally having handwritten corrections and scribbles in the margins, remember that one?

Yeah, there was a $289,000,000,000 error in there. You couldn't make this amateur hour sh** up - https://slate.com/business/2017/12/senate-republicans-may-have-made-a-usd260-billion-mistake-in-their-tax-bill.html

This is the party that people supposedly "trust" when it comes to taxes.

I don't know if it's madness or malevolence (distraction tactics included), but this may be the grimmest day of his presidency.

markodaly wrote: »

If there is violence over this, Trump will have proved his point to his electorate.

And what point would that be?

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

And if there is no violence then he should get a Nobel prize. Life is very simple, isn't it?

Calm down, no one is saying that. If there is violence over this he can sell himself as being a 'tough on terrorism guy' image to his electorate by standing side by side with Israel. If there is not, then he just made a loads of good friends ( and enemies but they hate him already).

markodaly wrote: »

If there is violence over this, Trump will have proved his point to his electorate.

There was Arab violence before this and this will continue.
This will have no effect on the peace negotiations as the Arabs refuse to have them.
Destroy Israel is their mantra.
That wont change.

Madagascan wrote: »

There was Arab violence before this and this will continue.
This will have no effect on the peace negotiations as the Arabs refuse to have them.
Destroy Israel is their mantra.
That wont change.

This has handed them a massive impetus to both recruit and fund raise.

markodaly wrote: »

You are seeing this from your own prism. Trump is not looking for your particular vote.

Do you think the average American cares what happens in the Middle East? They do care about their own security though and having the perception of a "tough on terrorism president" may go down well. That is unvarnished truth of this.

If people are concerned about their security, then surely doing something that is only going to incite terrorist violence against America is not that great an idea. America doing this just seems like great recruitment material for any terror groups. It would be like declaring the 1916 Rising executions a great move for keeping British citizens safe. If Palestinian terrorists point at this and say "look, America acted like they cared about a peaceful solution, but all they really care about is helping Israel subjugate us" it would be kind of hard for anyone to argue otherwise.

recedite wrote: »

What peace talks?

Trump is firmly on the Israeli side. At the same time, he also has the Saudis onside, which is a good trick to pull.
Yet again he is fulfilling a clearly signalled election promise. People may find it shocking that a politician would keep an election promise, but The Donald is no ordinary politician and he has been keeping election promises all along.
Now is the perfect time to move the embassy, with Israel strong and the neighbours busy making war on each other.

Some day there will be a single country there and Jerusalem will be the undisputed capital. As with Lebanon, all the people will eventually bury the hatchet and cobble together some sort of agreement in the interests of peace and prosperity.

So, on the one hand, there's Saudi Arabia (despite your claim), Iran, Germany, France, Turkey, and The Vatican, among many others, all agreeing that this is a terrible idea. I'll give it to Trump, it's incredible how well he's united disparate nations on a single topic.

On the other hand, there's Trump, and ..... that's about it. Oh, and you.

But clearly his sheer Donaldness guarantees that this will be the bigliest foreign policy decision in all of history.

C14N wrote: »

If people are concerned about their security, then surely doing something that is only going to incite terrorist violence against America is not that great an idea. America doing this just seems like great recruitment material for any terror groups. It would be like declaring the 1916 Rising executions a great move for keeping British citizens safe. If Palestinian terrorists point at this and say "look, America acted like they cared about a peaceful solution, but all they really care about is helping Israel subjugate us" it would be kind of hard for anyone to argue otherwise.

It beggars belief. Yesterday, the supreme court gave his ban of certain nations the go ahead. Today, he gave a significant portion of the world to dislike him (America) even more.

Even recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, he could have still said that a future capital of a Palestinian state could still be located in the East of the city but nah, why try to appease the people living in the middle of the mess.

People will die over this.

C14N wrote: »

Now that you mention it, where do the actual Israelis stand on this? Do they like it because they want people to acknowledge all of Jerusalem as Israeli territory, or are they more apprehensive because of the violence it might cause?

Watching BBC news tonight, Benjamin Nethanyahu was very complementary of the move. They are displaying both flags side by side on the walls of the old city.



There are calls for other countries to follow America's example and move their embassies to the city also.

On the Palestinian side, they disagree and think there will be trouble over it.

Tell me how wrote: »

Madagascan wrote: »

There was Arab violence before this and this will continue.
This will have no effect on the peace negotiations as the Arabs refuse to have them.
Destroy Israel is their mantra.
That wont change.

This has handed them a massive impetus to both recruit and fund raise.

And so has any one who has read the Koran.